Lindsey Graham’s support from South Carolina Republicans is eroding

Once thought to be a sure bet for re-election, a new poll shows that Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) has seen his support fall among South Carolina Republicans, as his three primary challengers begin their campaigns against him.

The poll, conducted by Landmark Communications and Rosetta Stone Communications, shows Graham at 42%, Lee Bright with 13%, Nancy Mace taking 10%, and Richard Cash at 7%. And though he fares better in head-to-head matchups against his primary challengers, Graham is still under 50%.

“These numbers should be of concern to the Graham campaign. The senator fails to reach 50% of the vote against any of his opponents,” said John Garst, president of Rosetta Stone Communications, in a release. “Graham does not break 40% among voters who think of themselves as evangelistic conservatives, and that group makes up 58% of the primary electorate.”

“Senator Graham has developed a serious problem with male voters and conservative voters in particular. His support among those demographic groups is weak,” added Mark Rountree, president of Landmark Communications. “But worse for Senator Graham is that he currently does not even win an outright majority in a potential runoff primary election, despite the fact that his opponents are not even well known to the general public.”

The survey of 500 likely South Carolina Republican voters was conducted on Sunday, August 25th and has a margin of error of 4.5%. Crosstabs can be found here or in the embed below.

Dispensing of Graham will not be an easy task. He had $6.3 million in his campaign warchest at the end of the second quarter of the year. But he has taken positions on a number of issues that are out of touch with South Carolina conservatives, many of which recently presented in a resolution proposed by activists in the Greenville County Republican Party. More recently, Graham has refused to get behind efforts to defund ObamaCare and favors going to war with Syria.

The views and opinions expressed by individual authors are not necessarily those of other authors, advertisers, developers or editors at United Liberty.